Colt Brings Back the Python

[Rick Lee]

I have Pachmyrs on my model 29 and just recently replaced the ones on my Commander. I wish I hadn't eBay'ed off the original S&W grips, but they were chipped and I was never going to use them. Still have the original receipt from Ray's in Dallas, 1981.

[Jeff Higgins]

I've come to really dislike rubber grips on my handguns. I had them on a number of guns when I was younger, believing they offered a few advantages like a better, more consistent grip, and a bit of relief from the sting of recoil associated with some of the heavier loads used in my hunting revolvers. I've since come to realize I was wrong about all of that.

Properly shaped, hard, smooth wooden grips are, in my opinion, superior in every way. They offer every bit as consistent of a grip, and I feel they absorb heavy recoil better than rubber. They don't squirm around and twist in the hand as much, and they don't grip the hand, causing the skin to twist and stretch. I just find them far more comfortable, especially with heavy loads. The key is that they are smooth rather than checkered - I dislike checkered wood grips almost as much as I dislike rubber grips. They just chaff the hand too much, and offer no advantage in holding onto the gun.

My only exception to the above are the hard rubber grips offered on the Peacemaker. They aren't sticky and grabby like the popular soft rubber grips, behaving far more like wood grips. And, well, they are just kind of traditional and, to me, aesthetically pleasing, so I put up with them. At least on the Colts. All of my other single actions wear wood.

Colt:



Virginian Dragoon:

[911boost]

My 686 Plus 6 inch came with the rubber grips and I purchased wooden ones separately. I agree with everyone’s comments.

My ex FIL has a Python that has been shoot less than 10 times, completely original that I have asked to be given to my son.

[Jeff Higgins]

Well, it looks like Colt is quietly acknowledging there is a problem with some of these new Pythons. They have recalled 100 examples that were sold through one major distributor. There may be more recalls coming but, for now, it appears that only the lot sent to this one distributor are suspect. "Reading between the lines" it may be Bud's Gun Shop. Hickock45's example that infamously had problems during the filming of his YouTube video came from Bud's. This is the one that failed to turn the cylinder on a number of occasions. There are at least six more with which various YouTube reviewers had the same issue.

[Tobra]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Like Tobra says, any design change must be resubmitted to the state for acceptance. These can be non-functional, purely cosmetic changes. Many manufacturers have grown tired of this and simply do not submit their new models for approval. I would suspect this is the case with Glock, where it simply was not worth it to them to submit their Gen 4 for approval.

As far as the Python, it meets current acceptance criteria. That does not mean Colt will submit it for approval. If they do not, it will not be legal for sale in California, whether it meets all criteria or not. I cannot imagine Colt ignoring this market, so I would be very surprised if they failed to submit it for approval.

I don't know.

My understanding is that Colt quit selling to LEO in California, because F-U California.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Tobra

I don't know.

My understanding is that Colt quit selling to LEO in California, because F-U California.

I know Barrett quit selling to California LEO. They do, however, still sell their long guns in the civilian market. The .416 Barrett, which is no more than the .50 BMG case necked down to .416 caliber, was developed specifically to get around California's ban on anything chambered in .50 BMG.

So, even though they adamantly refuse to sell anything to California LEO, they are not ignoring the civilian market. My guess (and only a guess) would be that Colt, if they were to remove themselves from any market in California, it would be the LEO market as well. They can't afford to ignore the civilian market.

[Jeff Higgins]

Well, it sounds like a few of the early on-line reviewers who had difficulty with their Pythons and sent them back are hearing back from Colt. Colt is saying the sideplates were loose, allowing the hand to flop over and skip over the ratchet on the rear of the cylinder. Certainly possible, I guess. I've sure had plenty of screws come loose on handguns over the years.

Single actions seem particularly prone to this, but I honestly cannot remember a double action doing this. There is a big difference in functionality of the screws that come loose on a single action and the side plate screws on a double action. The latter simply hold the sideplate onto the frame, capturing the revolver's mechanism inside. The screws that typically loosen on a single action, though, serve as the pivot points, or axles, for the various parts of the internal mechanism, like the hammer, bolt, and trigger.

Anyway, that's Colt's story and they are sticking to it. A couple of guys are already saying "no way in hell", so it's hard to say what's going on. No one has actually gotten their gun back yet. It will be interesting to see what happens when they do.

[Jeff Higgins]

This just landed in my in box from Colt. They are very much owning and addressing the problems with the new Python. I think that from here, knowing how Colt works, I would buy one with the utmost confidence. The last minute or so is worth watching, as it's a quick little "tutorial" on "how to buy the 'not available' Colt". I've done exactly as they say for decades, and I always (eventually) get my Colt.

[Rick Lee]

That was an interesting video. Colt seems to have a better PR consultant than quality control manager. They don't come out and say they screwed up bigly, but they explain how they're gonna make things right. The speaker appears sympathetic and knowledgable and promises all will be made right. This video is a month late, but it's still pretty good.

[Jeff Higgins]

We've both been in this game long enough to have seen a pretty good number of screw-ups from an awful lot of manufacturers. They all get them fixed as quietly as possible. I have never, before this, seen one take ownership at the level of producing a video to explain where they went wrong. That, in and of itself, is something.

[Rick Lee]

If it didn't have to do with guns, this would end up being a PR case study, sort of like what happened with the Susan Komen Foundation about 12 year ago.

[flatbutt]

Rather than start a new thread I'll hijack this one.

I've decided to get a wheel gun rather than another SA pistol.

I want a .357/.38 single/double action with no less than 4 inch barrel. I will go to the range and try a few but of course I want to canvas the crew here first.

I've already put the new Python and Cobra on the list. What others do you guys like?

[Jeff Higgins]

I love my old S&W Model 19, mid 1980's vintage. It's still available in their "Classic" line. It's a bit smaller than their current "L" framed guns (it's the smaller "K" frame), and will not take a steady diet of .357 mag loads, but all I really shoot in it are .38 Specials anyway. It's wonderfully accurate, has a great trigger, and is very well balanced. Here it is with a 1911 for comparison:

[aigel]

I'm not sold on the new python even after that video.

For the flatbutt question, I'd go with a pre-lock S&W 686 4" or 6" barrel that you can still get in very good condition for the same as a brand new lock version. The lock isn't a big deal but if you ever need or want to sell that gun, it will always be worth more than what you paid!

G

[911boost]

I have a post lock 686 plus in 6inch and really like it.

[aigel]

Yes, if you are ready to have a lock smith (haha) the 7 shot revolver sure is nice. I think there was only a very short period of no lock 7 shots? To me it is blasphemy to have a 7 shot 6gun! But some use it for self defense, so maybe they do feel an extra round is necessary. To me the .357 is a hunting revolver at best, I can't solve it with 6 rounds of .357 I'll probably won't do it with the 7th round.

[911boost]

I carry mine for mountain lions while hunting big game in CO and the plus was what my LE connection hadn’t for me at a very good price...

As for the lock, it’s hardly noticeable, but if a pre lock fell in my lap I would not say no.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally Posted by 911boost

I have a post lock 686 plus in 6inch and really like it.

I have a 6” and my son has a 4”, fantastic fun to shoot and in my opinion far better made than the Ruger I was also considering (but more expensive).

[flatbutt]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

I love my old S&W Model 19, mid 1980's vintage. It's still available in their "Classic" line. It's a bit smaller than their current "L" framed guns (it's the smaller "K" frame), and will not take a steady diet of .357 mag loads, but all I really shoot in it are .38 Specials anyway. It's wonderfully accurate, has a great trigger, and is very well balanced. Here it is with a 1911 for comparison:

The Model 19 sure looks tasty. I hope I can get one to try before commiting. What is the pull weight of that trigger? The book says 10lbs!

The 686 doesn't show up on their website. I may have trouble finding one.

[Jeff Higgins]

The 686 is a fantastic revolver, as its blued cousin, the 586. It's built on the slightly larger "L" frame, so it can digest a steady diet of .357 mag. A bit heavier than the Model 19, but not much. And yes, they are in fact readily available, in many configurations. Just set the "caliber" filter to ".357 magnum" and the "frame size" to medium (K/L):

http://www.smith-wesson.com/revolvers

The double action pull on mine is probably about ten pounds, which is really pretty darn good. The single action pull is a very crisp two pounds. I'll go so far as to say it's the best trigger on any of my handguns.